The US Conference of Catholic Bishops released an “Ethical and Religious Directive” this month that would ban any Catholic hospital, nursing home or hospice program from removing feeding tubes or ending palliative procedures of any kind, even when the individual has an advance directive to guide their end-of-life care. The Bishops’ directive even notes that patient suffering is redemptive and brings the individual closer to Christ. (...)

A 60Minutes piece this weekend looked at the cost of dying in America, showing that Medicare paid $50 billion in the last two months of patients’ lives in 2008. Compassion &amp; Choices focuses on the suffering at the end of life, not federal dollars, but they agree in general with the portrait shown by 60 Minutes. Incredibly, suffering is one of the selling points in the Catholic Bishops’ directive. “It’s quite specific about the role of suffering in Christian dogma,” Coombs Lee explained. “It says that suffering is redemptive, that it’s part of Christ’s passion. So they are pretty clear on their concern for the suffering of the patient.”

I don't need to say any of the things I'm thinking. You already know what they are.

I can respect that the Catholic Church values human life and would rather people live than die. That's an overly simplistic view of an incredibly complex issue, but whatever. However, in case anyone was wondering where the "line" is that has been crossed, it's right here:

...even when the individual has an advance directive to guide their end-of-life care.

FUCK. THAT.

Apparently there is no free will, there is only God's will. Or rather, the will of douchebags who claim to know absolutely what God's will would be, as if such a thing could possibly be known.

Anime is kind of like fish in that it is better the less "fishy" it is.

There's always the Mother Theresa option: Suffering is actually desirable in their belief system. Considering their stance on penitence and sin, and the constant emphasis on groveling, I wouldn't eliminate this from the realm of possibility.

"You haven't told me what I'm looking for.""Anything that might be of interest to Slitscan. Which is to say, anything that might be of interest to Slitscan's audience. Which is best visualized as a vicious, lazy, profoundly ignorant, perpetually hungry organism craving the warm god-flesh of the anointed. Personally I like to imagine something the size of a baby hippo, the color of a week-old boiled potato, that lives by itself, in the dark, in a double-wide on the outskirts of Topeka. It's covered with eyes and it sweats constantly. The sweat runs into those eyes and makes them sting. It has no mouth, Laney, no genitals, and can only express its mute extremes of murderous rage and infantile desire by changing the channels on a universal remote. Or by voting in presidential elections." --Colin Laney and Kathy Torrance, William Gibson's Idoru

There's some political mumbo jumbo behind it, apparently, not within the article. The word being spread on the news sources my Dad watches/listens to is that the bill includes an article that require affirmative action for homosexuals, including in churchs or something? So, something that strikes me as pretty unlikely, seeing as it would be one of the quickest ways to get the bill overturned (violation of separation of church and state, public outcry, legitimate grievance rather than shenanigans, etc etc).

I dunno if the Archdiocese has been made to believe this or if it's just more propaganda or what, but it's something I've been told and I felt like commenting.

Yeah, I think that's right up there with, "if we let gay people marry each other, they'll want to marry horses and infants next." It's notable because people believe it (and, oh, do they ever), but it's not really based in anything credible.